so again, i make the mistake of reading random journals. i understand that we all have some difference or other with the management of the site. some have more of a problem than others. however, the way in which you express your differences with them makes all the difference with everyone else.

how am i to figure out what the problem is if all i can make out from your attempt at polemics is a ranting diatribe seemingly written by a twelve year old boy who has seen way too much tarentino? a classic example of the adult treatment of a problem comes from a couple of months ago when michael helms was suspended for a period of time. the details can be found in the journal entry titled "banned!!!" this was a very mature and professional way of expressing his disagreement, and it reflected well on mr. helms.

without pointing any fingers or mentioning names, i'm just noticing that a lot of journals out there seem to simply be the verbal equivalent of looking at the wall next to a bar and noticing the puddle of puke there. it's clear that there was a problem, but it's ugly, it stinks, and it's not too clear what went on.

if you have posted material that has been readable and interesting, i will continue to read it, and i thank you for the quality of your expression.